Re: [v6ops] draft-linkova-v6ops-nd-cache-init to working group draft

[Mikael Abrahamsson <[e-mail]>]

On Tue, 23 Jul 2019, Fred Baker wrote:

> In yesterday's meeting, the sense of the room and a discussion of charters at the mike suggested that draft-linkova-v6ops-nd-cache-init should become a working group draft. Doing so will require 6man to agree to let v6ops suggest specific changes to RFC 4861 under the rubric of "operational solutions", as discussed in the draft and https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/105/materials/slides-105-v6ops-neighbor-cache-entries-on-first-hop-routers-operational-considerations-00; the argument for not kicking those out to 6man is that the authors of RFC 4861 are no longer in a position to approve errata to it, which would be the other obvious approach (I'm not sure that's true of Erik Nordmark, but whatever). It would also need to be considered to update RFC 4861.
>
> Do we agree to take draft-linkova-v6ops-nd-cache-init as a working group draft?

I support making this a working group draft, this is a problem we should 
solve.

I'd just like to check, have the authors checked the proposed solution 
list against https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/savi/documents/ to make sure 
the solutions we're proposing are not in conflict with behavior SAVI 
prescribes?

-- 
Mikael Abrahamsson    email: [e-mail]